fishbiscuit5

odysseyroc wrote:It's aji, it's a sauce that you find in Peruvian restaruants. I've recently become obsessed with the Peruvian dish, tallarin saltado, so I decided to make some this weekend and thought I'd make some aji to go along with it.

mmmm... I love Peruvian food and could drink a gallon of aji sauce right now. My favorite Peruvian restaurant in NYC, in case anybody is looking to try the cuisine and lives in the area. http://www.piopionyc.com

Odysseyroc, this shirt is fantastic! I really love how you always make me want to eat tacos for dinner. It's a conspiracy. You must have a vested interest in making me spend my money on tacos.

odysseyroc

fishbiscuit5 wrote:mmmm... I love Peruvian food and could drink a gallon of aji sauce right now. My favorite Peruvian restaurant in NYC, in case anybody is looking to try the cuisine and lives in the area. http://www.piopionyc.com

Odysseyroc, this shirt is fantastic! I really love how you always make me want to eat tacos for dinner. It's a conspiracy. You must have a vested interest in making me spend my money on tacos.

AdderXYU

Do you think a weighted vote based on number of actual woots is a valid voting method?

Problems I would see from this are obviously the disenfranchising of newer people (like myself) because our vote is only a fraction of the votes for people actually willing to buy everything that woot prints.

Or weighted averages based on derby wins, vs. what you voted with a nice little "did this person actually buy this shirt" factor in for good measure.

To be clear, I'm not the biggest fan of how hard edged you are on lots of things...but at least I appreciate it a little because I don't always know every copyright violation out there, and I couldn't really tell someone what parody was vs. reference, or plagiarism. Sure you always take it too far, but I'm always guilty of that with things I'm passionate about myself, so I can not like it...but can't fault you on it.

So you are passionate about it, what is the fix? Because your suggestion seems to already be in place with a rejectionator. (You don't agree with the rejectionator about everything obviously...so the inherent flaw is manifested.) Should there be a board of wootstaffers made up of loyal wootees comprising of wootartists and wootbuyers with at least half a dozen whatthepoopisawoots for good measure? Checks 'n balances?

My ideal view still stands at: 1st is 1st, 2nd is a woot select from the fog, 3rd is a woot select that could be from anywhere in the derby, fog or otherwise. To me it is not perfect (first place often sucks out loud), but it is a mix that means votes count for something while also allowing deserving work to have a far higher shot of printing.

Weighted accounts, however, simply wouldn't work. Power would beget more power. If you have lots of money, your vote would count more. If you often vote for winners, your vote would simply get stronger and stronger, and we'd see far less diversity as the status-quo voters gained more and more power and perpetuated it.

Woot choice, of course, isn't ideal. They regularly pick awful HMs during derbies. Other sites where there is editorial content have shown flaws in their choices (threadless, for example, has gotten dangerously close to one-note over the last year). However, they also show the benefits of this perspective. PRIOR to threadless' current falling from grace, they were a model for creative designs winning, and winning big money, because they didn't just print the popular, but they took votes into consideration, took comments into consideration, and took their own personal vision into consideration. Woot's Editor's Choice decisions, while again never perfect, (and even most of their daily choices) show a site whose overall vision is MUCH different than their derbies pan out. Basically, it can only improve.

The rejectionator rejects based off rules. Sometimes. Sometimes it ignores rules. But it can't really justifiably reject based off taste. If something fits all rules, but is still absolutely terrible, it can still print. And can still print over much much better work. That requires editorial content far beyond the rejectionator.

jabberjaws13

odysseyroc wrote:I've never been there, but there's a place called Taste of Peru is supposed to be pretty good. It was featured on Drive-ins Diners & Dives.

thanks i'll check it out! i can't do that dish you mentioned though because my body rejects stringy noodles. spaghetti, linguini, angel hair, whatever, get that crap outta here. it's all in my mind i'm sure, but i can't eat it. any other dishes you recommend?

soshad

odysseyroc

jabberjaws13 wrote:thanks i'll check it out! i can't do that dish you mentioned though because my body rejects stringy noodles. spaghetti, linguini, angel hair, whatever, get that crap outta here. it's all in my mind i'm sure, but i can't eat it. any other dishes you recommend?

AdderXYU

jstjred wrote:This actually sounds pretty good...and we would just trust that the woot choices are based off of comments and what-not.

I could believe this...but it's not like I've been here long enough to be attached to the other way of doing things.

I do agree with the woot choices being dangerous though...because I do see a lot of pretty awful shirts during the week...even though a lot of decent designs on the derbies never get printed. Sad.

I appreciate the response.

The thing of it is that dailies can often be bad, but the important thing is they're also diverse. this week may not be the best example of it, but last week we had something weird, something cute and jokey, and something artistic. None sold amazingly, but they were all different shirts, and that alone is comforting.

Basically there are cons to every idea. I just think there are far less to mine, and far more to woot's, as compared with similar sites.

Woot.com is operated by Woot Services LLC.
Products on Woot.com are sold by Woot, Inc., other than items on Gourmet.Woot which are sold by the seller specified on the product detail page.
Product narratives are for entertainment purposes and frequently employ
literary point of view;
the narratives do not express Woot's editorial opinion.
Aside from literary abuse, your use of this site also subjects you to Woot's
terms of use
and
privacy policy.
Woot may designate a user comment as a Quality Post, but that doesn't mean we agree with or guarantee anything said or linked to in that post.